The past few weeks the entire internet has been going bonkers over the Google phone, yet another in a long line of Android phones that has everyone's knickers in twists. Up until now we had to go by small photos and Twitter messages from Google employees, but now we have full specifications, a hands-on, and video.

Sounds like someone's got more sense in Bangkok then. Here in the US, and many other places as well, carriers are allowed to lock the phone to only accept their own sim card. In fact, I can't recall ever getting a phone from a carrier here that wasn't locked. Personally, I think it's stupid. The carriers could still subsidize the phone and make their offers attractive without the lock. But then again, all of the cel services here suck in one way or another, so I guess they want to get a hook into you with the phone lock.
Personally I think that falls under a monopoly, as that gives one carrier an exclusive on a phone more often than not. Still, the overpaid lawyers obviously found a way to get around that idea.

Sounds like someone's got more sense in Bangkok then. Here in the US, and many other places as well

Sounds like pretty much the entire world has more sense than the U.S when it comes to mobile phones.
Sure, you can get locked phones here (Philippines) if you want to get a better deal with the carrier but you can just go to any store and buy pretty much any available phone unlocked. Heck, there are even multi-SIM phones.

Sounds like pretty much the entire world has more sense than the U.S when it comes to mobile phones.

Canada doesn't, we have the same issue.

Though we only had one true GSM provider in the past, so I guess the point was moot.

Now that all of the major carriers are HSDPA, and can support all of the modern handsets, this is probably going to become a bigger issue up here.

I don't mind a locked handset if the carrier is subsidizing the price. It has it's advantages. For instance, I was able to upgrade to a 3GS less than a year after I purchased a 3G, for the same price a new customer would be paying. Simply had to renew my contract. As someone who always likes to have the latest shiny thing, it's more cost effective to lock in and receive the subsidy assuming I have no intention of leaving in the future (which, again, with only a single GSM provider was never a consideration in the past).

In the past, the only real annoyance was the inability to use a local pay-per-use SIM if I was traveling. Moving networks after contract expiration was never really an issue, since the others couldn't support the phones.

Now that all of the providers are supporting the same standard, I suspect this will become a larger issue as current customers look to start migrating networks, and I suspect the carriers will dig their heels in even deeper.

The one thing that has irritated me, though, is that while the provider will "subsidize" the cost of your phone through the monthly service fee, they won't reduce your service fee if you choose to pay full price for the phone, or acquire one elsewhere. They simply enjoy higher profits without having to subsidize the phone. I'm wondering if competition now is going to change that stance...